Barriers to the HPV vaccine

In an inspiring session at COGI 2018, four experts discussed the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine; its safety, efficacy and some of the key barriers to a successful vaccination programme.

Since the introduction of the HPV vaccine around 10 years ago, the UK has developed a largely successful vaccination programme. Dr. Elmar Joura shared data demonstrating that coverage rates are almost 90% and prevalence of HPV16 and HPV18 have in turn reduced by 75% and 86% respectively. However, in other countries coverage rates are much lower. Dr. Joura explained that Japan has a rate of just 0.6%. A 2016 study showed Italy, Netherlands, Norway and Spain also have coverage rates under 60% while France has a rate of just 20%.[1]

The efficacy of the vaccine has been established, Prof. Jorma Paavonen explained, with Phase III trials demonstrating protection against persistent HPV infections, a range of precancers and genital warts (HPV6/11). Safety of the vaccine has also been carefully studied.  Research indicates that the HPV vaccine does not have adverse effects on pregnancy outcomes or cause the onset of autoimmune diseases.[2],[3] In addition the World Health Organisation (WHO) have investigated a number of rare conditions that have speculatively been associated with the vaccine. It concluded that there was no increased risk in outcomes after vaccination.

So, with the efficacy and safety of the vaccine supported by extensive research, why are attendance rates so variable?

 

The path to vaccine hesitation

Dr. Pauline Paterson explained that vaccine hesitancy should be considered as a continuum. While there are individuals that refuse all vaccines, some only delay vaccination and others comply but with hesitation or caution.

There are three main drivers of hesitancy, explained Dr. Paterson.

-          Complacency – This can lead people to perceive a lack of value or need for the vaccine. No visibility of disease threat or misinformation over the seriousness of a disease can all contribute.

-          Convenience – Poor access to the vaccine can prevent people from attending vaccinations

-          Confidence – People may lack trust in vaccines, healthcare providers or scientific truths.  

It is these hesitant groups that can more easily be affected by rumours, stories and case histories that may be expressed in the media. In today’s digital world, the internet allows for rapid global spread of misinformation that exacerbates mistrust and hesitancy over vaccination programmes.

A clear example of this is in Japan. Following several years of a successful HPV vaccination programme with attendance rates of around 70%, a Japanese social media scare caused widespread national public concern over the safety of the vaccine. As a result the Japanese government stopped proactively recommending the vaccination and even provided compensation to one individual leading to mass one sided media coverage. Dr. Paterson explained how the internet allowed fears raised in Japan to spread globally, as far as Kenya, Colombia and the UK.  

 

How can we combat vaccine hesitation?

Combating vaccine hesitation is essential for maintaining good public health. When addressing the issue it is important to remember that while healthcare providers remain the most trusted influencer of vaccination decisions, they need more support to address public questioning over vaccines.

Dr. Paterson suggested that strategies addressing hesitancy should be multi-factorial, combining mass media, social mobilization and communication training for healthcare professionals. When considering how to improve HPV vaccination attendance, she indicated four key steps to consider:

-          Ensure the programme is gender neutral

-          Provide a school-based programme

-          Ensure gynecologists keep patients informed, and HCPs keep healthcare professionals continue sharing key factual information

-          Implement organised HPV screening

 

There are many challenges to overcome in addressing vaccine hesitation and the barriers to attendance. However, evidence demonstrates that the HPV vaccine is both safe and effective. We hope that in the future we can combat these barriers to vaccination and work towards effective eradication of HPV.


Sources:

[1] Uhart M, Adam M, Dahlab A, Bresse X. Loss of chance associated with sub-optimal HPV vaccination coverage rate in France. Papillomavirus Res. 2017;3:73-79.

[2] Scheller NM, Pasternak B, Mølgaard-Nielsen D, Svanström H, Hviid A. Quadrivalent HPV vaccination and the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(13):1223–33.

[3] Lehtinen M, Eriksson T, Apter D, et al. Safety of the human papillomavirus (HPV)-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine in adolescents aged 12-15 years: Interim analysis of a large community-randomized controlled trial. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2016;12(12):3177-3185.

Fertility preservation in women with POI

Primary ovarian insufficiency (POI) is a clinical syndrome defined by loss of ovarian activity before the age of 40 years. It is also known by the term premature menopause and can be characterised by menstrual disturbance with raised gonadotropins and low estradiol. While incidence of POI depends on ethnicity, generally the risk is 1 in 1000 at age 30 and 1 in 100 at age 40.

The consequences of POI are unfortunately long term and severe including:

-          Cognitive dysfunction

-          Cardiovascular Disease

-          Autoimmune diseases

-          Osteoporosis

-          Increased mortality

-          Infertility

Presenting on the final day of COGI 2018, Prof. Claus Andersen explained that there is a key focus on providing women with POI the option of fertility preservation. So, what are the available treatments?

 

Approaches for fertility preservation

In order to plan the most effective fertility preservation treatment, Prof. Andersen stressed that it is important to predict as much as possible whether POI may be imminent. How can we do this? Well, often the condition is hereditary. In fact, Prof. Andersen suggested that around 10-15% of women with POI would have a first degree relative who has been affected. Similarly, if a woman has a mother or older sister affected this leads to an approximately 6x higher risk.

There are many more available options for treating women with imminent POI than confirmed POI. Therefore, it is essential women are informed about symptoms and risks. It is also essential that health care professionals understand this increased risk and consider it when diagnosing a potential case.

At COGI we were shown data suggesting that a quarter of women waited over five years for a correct diagnosis, with over half seeing more than three clinicians.  Unfortunately, there is no definitive test for predicting POI, however we can hope that this could be developed in future.

 

Imminent POI

For women with imminent POI, Prof. Andersen discussed three main first line approaches:

-          Vitrification of oocytes or embryos following ovarian stimulation

-          Freezing ovarian tissue

-          A combination of oocyte and ovarian tissue freezing

 

Confirmed POI

For those with confirmed POI, treatment is more complex. In some cases, sufferers may experience spontaneous pregnancy. One study of 358 women revealed that a cumulative pregnancy rate of 4.3% at 48 months.[1]

However the alternative is a procedure called in vitro follicle activation (IVA). This involves the removal of an ovary, the preparation of cortical tissue recruiting dormant primordial follicles, freezing and thawing before transplantation back into the POI sufferer. Research is still be undertaken into IVA. However, with refinement and improvement it could lead to a new effective strategy for POI patients to conceive their own genetic children.[2]  


Sources:

[1] M. Bidet, A. Bachelot, E. Bissauge et al. Resumption of Ovarian Function and Pregnancies in 358 Patients With Premature Ovarian Failure. Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey: 2012. 67(4). 231–232. doi: 10.1097/OGX.0b013e3182502238

[2] Kawamura K, Kawamura N, Hsueh AJ. Activation of dormant follicles: a new treatment for premature ovarian failure?. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2016;28(3):217-22.

Considering the role of HRT in CHD

Coronary Heart Disease (CHD) is well understood to be one of the major causes of mortality worldwide. Risk factors are generally equal for men and women, except for one main consideration: Menopause.

In an inspiring session at COGI, Prof. John Stevenson explained that women who experience earlier menopause are the most at risk. Indeed, those who experience menopause below the age of 40 are at 2x greater risk of CHD than women who are above 45 years. So, what can be done?

 

An opportunity for HRT?

Prof. Stevenson explained that HRT could provide an answer. Research indicates that estrogen has a clear biological effect on the cardiovascular system, demonstrating beneficial effects on some of the key risk factors of CHD. These include dyslipidaemia, insulin resistance and arterial endothelial function. [1] However, dealing with the problem is not that easy.

The disparagement of HRT in the 2000 Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) study still fuels debate over the benefit and safety of its use for CHD.[2] In addition, some randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have suggested only negligible effects.[3]

While Prof. Stevenson accepted that there is a lack of definitive evidence supporting HRT as a prevention for postmenopausal CHD, he demonstrated that there is a growing number of epidemiological and observational studies supporting its use. One recent Cochrane review studying 40,410 women indicated a decrease in CHD risk for those starting HRT treatment within 10 years of menopause.[4] Similarly a separate study suggested that women <60 years treated by HRT experienced a reduced total mortality.[5] Long term safety has also been demonstrated with even the WHI publishing data showing that in women aged 50-59, treatment with HRT provided in a hazard ratio of 0.65 (CI 0.44-0.96). [6] In older women there was no statistical difference. [6]

 

Timing is key

Time is an essential factor to consider.  Prof. Stevenson explained that to have a beneficial effect, early intervention is needed. In fact, research supporting the use of the HRT as a primary prevention of CHD in postmenopausal women has demonstrated no benefit if the intervention in older women.[3],[7] However, it was stressed that while there was no benefit for late intervention, there was also no evidence of harm.  

There are other considerations to take into account. Benefit may also depend on the type of hormones being administered or the dose of hormones. Prof. Stevenson concluded in stating that HRT should only be used where appropriate and with careful consideration.


Sources:

[1] Stevenson JC. HRT and cardiovascular disease. In Lumsden, MA, ed, Best Practice and Research Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Vol 23. Elsevier 2009:109–120. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S152169340800148X

[2] Rossouw JE, Anderson GL, Prentice RL et al.; Writing Group for the Women’s Health Initiative Investigators. Risks and benefits of estrogen plus progestin in healthy postmenopausal women: principal results from the Women’s Health Initiative randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2002;288:321–333. doi: 10.1001/jama.288.3.321

[3] Manson JE, Hsia J, Johnson KC et al. Estrogen plus progestin and the risk of coronary heart disease. N Engl J Med2003;349:523–534. doi: 10.1056/nejmoa030808

[4] Boardman HM, Hartley L, Eisinga A et al. Hormone therapy for preventing cardiovascular disease in post-menopausal women.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015:10(3);CD002229. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002229.pub4

[5] Salpeter SR, Walsh JME, Greyber E et al. Mortality associated with hormone replacement therapy in younger and older women: a meta-analysis. J Gen Int Med 2004;19:791–804. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.30281.x

[6] Manson JE, Chlebowski RT, Stefanick ML, et al. Menopausal Hormone Therapy and Health Outcomes During the Intervention and Extended Poststopping Phases of the Women’s Health Initiative Randomized Trials. JAMA. 2013;310(13):1353–1368. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.278040

[7] D.M. Herrington, D.M. Reboussin, K.B. Brosnihan, P.C. Sharp, S.A. Shumaker, T.E. Snyder, et al., Effects of estrogen replacement on the progression of coronary–artery atherosclerosis, N Engl J Med 343(8) (2000) 522–529.

Social freezing - A debate

 Traditionally oocytes were only frozen for the purpose of fertility preservation, including for women who may be undergoing chemotherapy.

However, in recent years the concept of social freezing has flourished, where oocytes are frozen for non-medical reasons. This decision to delay conception and pregnancy may be taken for a number of different reasons. Indeed overall, research suggests that both age of marriage and pregnancy are generally rising in high economic countries.

At COGI we were treated to an engaging debate on the key discussions surrounding social freezing, considering whether it truly is a benefit or whether it should be seen as a purely commercial function.

Dr. Ana Cobo opened the discussion, explaining that social freezing can provide effective results in younger women. Oocyte quality is affected by age, therefore the younger the age when the oocyte frozen, the better the chance of a positive clinical outcome later on. However, Dr. Cobo discussed that the majority of patients desiring social freezing were over 35 years old. 16% were 40 years or older. She explained that the outcomes in older women were significantly reduced and that the quality of the oocytes would be severely impacted.

Even in younger healthy women, there is not a complete success rate, with survival failure still a risk. Dr. Cobo shared data from a cohort of younger women which also demonstrated that after a single cycle failure, risk of a second cycle failure was 4x greater. It is therefore important to manage expectations and provide clear information to all women desiring to undertake social freezing.

 

Is social  freezing a purely commercial product?

In his presentation, Dr. Norbert Gleicher reiterated the importance of providing women with accurate and evidence based information in order for them to make an informed decision before undertaking social freezing.

He argued that social freezing can be seen as a purely commercial product. In the US, misinformation and aggressive advertising results in misunderstanding that oocytes can be frozen at any age and will be able to be used to deliver a healthy child when desired. Dr. Gleicher explained that social freezing is often advertised as an insurance, when in fact the success of the process is much less certain.

We must also consider the low number of returning women to actually use the frozen oocytes. In one framework, Dr. Gliecher discussed that only 12% women actually returned. With the high upfront costs associated with freezing oocytes, the low level of returning women and the uncertain level of success, we can see why it is so important to understand why ensuring a high level of informed consent and transparency is so important.

 

Is social freezing cost effective?

Dr. Zion Ben Rafael closed the debate by arguing that social freezing is not cost effective. He explained that the cost is an estimated $1million per birth and that the process is only cost effective after the age of 37. However, with live birth rates known to be lower in women over 35, while the process may be cost effective there is no guarantee of success. While success rates are higher in younger women, Dr. Rafael explained that the younger a woman is, the less likely it is that they will use their frozen oocytes as it more likely that they will have a natural birth.

Why we should consider epigenetic factors for IVF

 Research has demonstrated that children born through assisted reproductive technology (ART) are at a higher risk of preterm birth and associated morbidity.[1] So, why is? Well, the cause is likely to be multifactorial. There is the potential that IVF techniques could result in obstetric complications that negatively impact the child, or that ovarian stimulation may negatively impact placental development.[1] However, growing evidence suggests that parental characteristics play a crucial role.  

The opening night of the 26th Annual COGI Conference kicked off with a thought provoking exploration of this fascinating area of epigenetics, considering how parental factors can affect the health of an IVF child.  Epigenetics, the speakers explained, is inherently linked to the concept of developmental plasticity. Specific input during development can produce a lasting difference in phenotype.[2] As such, factors including fetal programming, metabolic endocrine disruption and structural change in organs can all significantly affect the birth of the child.

Effectively understanding how parental factors may affect future health outcomes could help us in the drive for increased precision medicine, where we can adapt specific treatments based on individual factors.

 

Caesarean Sections

 

Prof. Giancarlo Di Rienzo explained that IVF is associated with an increased use of Caesarean Section (CS) during birth. He showed that CS is in turn linked to increases in risk of:

-          Neonatal morbidity

-          Auto-immune diseases in the offspring

-          Metabolic disease in the offspring

 

Maternal Obesity and Smoking

 

Maternal obesity was highlighted as an important factor leading to higher risk of pre-term birth. Similarly, maternal smoking was shown to cause significant epigenetic changes. Interestingly, not only does smoking negatively affect the mother and the unborn child, but if the child is a female the smoke could also affect her reproductive cells. Therefore, these epigenetic changes could result in transgenerational negative effects. Indeed, Prof. Rienzo explained how increased risk of both pre-term birth and small for gestational age (SGA) infants has been shown to span multiple generations.

In his presentation, Prof. Nick Macklon also reiterated the role that diet and nutrition has in affecting epigenetic change.  

 

Could a Mediterranean Diet help?

 

Prof. Macklon explained that a Mediterranean diet is often recommended to women preparing for IVF. But is there really a benefit? To answer this question, he shared data assessing whether the diet has any significant positive impact on embryo quality and overall IVF success rate.

While there was some cohort evidence that the Mediterranean diet positively related to clinical pregnancy, Prof. Macklon explained that we must consider the important confounding factors including microbiome and genetics. He demonstrated that the positive impact of the diet, along with other advertised nutritionals on IVF outcomes is very slight, however this may have a greater cumulative effect over time.


Sources:

[1] A. Pinborg, U.B. Wennerholm, L.B. Romundstad, et al; Why do singletons conceived after assisted reproduction technology have adverse perinatal outcome? Systematic review and meta-analysis, Human Reproduction Update, Volume 19, Issue 2, 1 March 2013, Pages 87–104, https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dms044

[2] Nettle D, Bateson M. Adaptive developmental plasticity: what is it, how can we recognize it and when can it evolve?. Proc Biol Sci. 2015;282(1812):20151005.

The freeze all debate: an introduction

Despite IVF technology evolving significantly over the last 40 years, the process is far from perfect. Current research is still incredibly important to study how we can improve live birth rates, patient safety and reduce the time to live birth. [1]

One area of particular debate is whether a freeze all or fresh transfer approach is preferable when transferring embryos. But what is a freeze all approach and why is this discussion important?

What is a freeze all approach?

Following oocyte stimulation, retrieval and oocyte fertilisation, two options for embryo transfer are available. During a fresh embryo transfer a selected embryo can be transferred back to the mother soon after oocyte retrieval. Alternatively, the embryos can be vitrified and stored for transfer later. This is also called the “freeze all” approach, where embryos are then thawed before transfer.[1] 

The freeze all method was initially developed for the purpose of fertility preservation, such as for patients due to undergo chemotherapy. However, there is evidence that it may be a preferred option for all fertility patients. This is in light of data suggesting that staggering oocyte stimulation and embryo transfer allows the endometrium to be better primed for receipt of an oocyte.[2] There is also evidence that it can lessen the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS).[1]

 

Effect of the freeze all method on outcomes in pregnancy, birth and neonate health

A 2014 retrospective cohort study, the largest of its kind, concluded that the use of vitrified thawed embryos did not worsen the outcomes in respect to pregnancy, birth and neonate health in comparison to the use of fresh embryos. The only notable differences were a greater number of interventions and a lower number of urinary tract infections reported with the vitrified oocyte group compared to the fresh oocyte group.[3]

 Further data from the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology in 2011, found that gestational carriers receiving frozen-thawed embryos had 7-8% higher age-adjusted success rates than non-gestational carrier comparators receiving fresh embryos.[2]

 

The programmed endometrium 

There is evidence to suggest that ovarian stimulation can cause irregular endocrine milieu which could hinder embryo implantation during a fresh IVF cycle. Whereas, the freeze all method allows thawed embryos to be transferred at later cycles when the endometrium is programmed to be more receptive to freeze-thawed embryos.[1]

 

Risk of OHSS

There is evidence that the risk of developing OHSS is greater during fresh IVF cycles as oocyte development, retrieval and embryo transfer occur around the same time. It has been suggested that staggering oocyte stimulation by using the freeze all method could reduce this risk. Robust randomised controlled trials are underway to determine if the freeze-all method could lessen the risk of OHSS without reducing successful treatment outcomes.[1]

 

The debate continues at COGI

The World Congress on Controversies in Obstetrics, Gynecology & Infertility (COGI) congress will be held in London on 23rd-25th November, with key discussions including a debate on social freezing and a presentation titled ‘the end of freeze all?’. We will be attending to provide you with the latest updates from the conference, including research highlights and key messages.

Sources:

1.       Niederberger, C., Pellicer, A. and Cohen, J. et al. Forty years of IVF. Fertil Steril. 2018; 110 (2), 185-324.

2.       Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. 2010 and 2011 SART fertility success rate report. Available at: http://www.sart.org/SART_Success_Rates.

3.       Cabo, A., Serra, V., Garrido, N. et al., Obstetric and perinatal outcome of babies born from vitrified oocytes. Fertil Steril. 2014; 102 (4), 1006-1015.

HRT to treat symptoms of menopause

Menopause is an event that naturally occurs in all women from around the age of 40 onwards. It is characterised by the lack of periods and concurrent reduction of oestrogen and progesterone levels in the blood, which has a wide range of effects on the body.

How is menopause diagnosed?

Symptoms of menopause can include hot flushes, night sweats, joint aches and headaches, all of which can be particularly bothersome in day-to-day life. Menopause is typically diagnosed retrospectively based on the presence of these symptoms, the patient’s age and frequency of periods. However, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has recently permitted the marketing of the first diagnostic kit that can identify patients who are entering their menopausal transition. The technology uses declining levels of anti-Müllerian hormone concentrations in the blood as a marker, thus allowing treatments to be administered promptly.[1]

What is the current treatment landscape for menopause?

Lifestyle changes such as healthy eating, reducing alcohol intake and regular exercise can sometimes help to alleviate menopausal symptoms. In some cases, hormone replacement therapy (HRT) may be prescribed to top-up oestrogen and/or progesterone levels, aiming to restore the hormonal balance. HRT for menopause is a key area of interest and has been the focus of recent major randomised controlled trials (RCTs).[2]

What do the experts say on HRT?

In theory (and in practice), HRT has the potential to reverse the symptoms of menopause. However, there have been some concerns on the side effects associated with this type of treatment. Although both the North American Menopause Society (NAMS)[3] and European Menopause and Andropause Society (EMAS)[4]  consider HRT to be the most effective treatment for vasomotor symptoms, genitourinary syndrome of menopause and preventing bone loss and fracture, they do highlight the risk of cardiovascular events, endometrial hyperplasia and certain cancers associated with HRT. To tip the benefit-risk balance in our favour, the appropriate dose, formulation and route of administration should be all individualised to the patient at treatment initiation and adapted throughout treatment where necessary. [2]

How is the field of HRT evolving?

Following the publication of initial findings from an RCT by the Women’s Health Institute (WHI) there were fears that HRT increases the risk of breast cancer and cardiovascular disease. As a result, the use of non-FDA-approved compounded hormone therapy in the US increased and FDA-approved hormone therapies declined.[5] However, subsequent detailed analyses showed that these fears were misrepresented and the risks were only applicable to a small subset of patients. Since then, it has been an upward battle to turn the field around and encourage HCPs and women to consider the evidence and opt for approved therapies, rather than taking non-approved compounded therapies with unknown risks.

The change is upon us, slowly but surely

The US has recently seen the approval of the first bioidentical combination HRT containing 17β-estradiol and progesterone (chemically-identical to those found in the body) for the treatment of moderate to severe vasomotor symptoms associated with menopause in women with a uterus. The REPLENISH trial demonstrated that the frequency and severity of vasomotor symptoms were significantly decreased with the combo therapy compared with placebo and no endometrial hyperplasia events were reported over the 12-month trial period.[6] This approval marks a milestone in the field of HRT and could be the turnaround needed to ensure women receive the most appropriate treatment for their menopause.

Based on the recent diagnostic testing and HRT approvals, could it be time to revisit the guidelines? What are the learnings from REPLENISH and other pivotal trials that can be applied to pipeline therapies? What else do we need to do to pull ourselves out of the shadows of the WHI trial? We will be at the COGI Congress to find out more! The congress will be held in London on 23rd-25th November and we will be sharing with you the latest expert opinions and discussions in a special session on “HRT: Where we came from. Where are we going?”. We will also be posting a number of other blogs before, during and after the Congress that will build on the latest clinical and real-world developments in Women’s Health. So stay tuned for more!

 


Sources:

[1] US FDA. https://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm624284.htm [Accessed October 2018].

[2] Woods NF and Utian W. Quality of life, menopause, and hormone therapy: an update and recommendations for future research. Menopause. 2018 Jul;25(7):713-720.

[3] The NAMS 2017 Hormone Therapy Position Statement Advisory Panel. The 2017 hormone therapy position statement of The North American Menopause Society. Menopause. 2017 Jul;24(7):728-753.

[4] Armeni E, Lambrinoudaki I, Ceausu I et al. Maintaining postreproductive health: A care pathway from the European Menopause and Andropause Society (EMAS). Maturitas. 2016 Jul;89:63-72.

[5] American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Compounded bioidentical menopausal hormone therapy. Committee Opinion No. 532. Obstet Gynecol 2012;120:411–5.

[6] Lobo RA, Archer DF, Kagan R et al. A 17b-Estradiol–Progesterone Oral Capsule for Vasomotor Symptoms in Postmenopausal Women. Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Jul;132(1):161-170.

40 years of IVF – key breakthroughs

2018 marks the 40th year since the birth of the first IVF baby. This remarkable technological advance changed the world and millions of children are alive today that could not have been born before the development of IVF.

Here we will discuss some of the key breakthroughs in the history of IVF and what advances we may be able to look forward to in the future.

 

1.       The evolution of gonadotropins

The evolution of gonadotropins has been instrumental in improving IVF live birth outcomes.  Early attempts to extract preparations from animals, human cadavers and human urine encountered issues with purity and risk of disease. However, over the decades dedicated research striving for purer, safer and more efficacious gonadotropins have led us to where we are today. Now, availability of recombinant hFSH, recombinant hLH and recombinant hCG allow clinicians to develop individualised protocols for each patient. Coupled with personalised and precise dosing, we can now see both improved patient safety and increased live birth rates. And with more research currently taking place into developing oral active FSH antagonists and agonists we hope to see this evolution continue.

 

2.       Advanced embryo culture systems

Culture media has come a long way since the simple salt solutions developed nearly 150 years ago. IVF laboratories are now using complex optimised media, standardised and regulated to promote consistency and a high level of quality. And as we know, a high quality media is just one factor to consider when culturing embryos. The development of closed culture systems has provided embryologists with a stable environment helping to shield the embryo from outside stresses and increase both efficiency and efficacy.

 

3.       Cryopreservation

In 1971 the field of embryology changed as the first cleavage-stage mouse embryos were frozen. This led the way for cryopreservation of human embryos at all embryonic stages. Improvements in cryopreservation technologies mean that embryo survival rates are now nearly 100% and provided women with the choice to freeze eggs for fertility preservation as well as for medical reasons. Research continues into this area, and the debate on whether a ‘freeze all’ approach should be applied is still being hotly debated.

 

4.       ICSI

Early pioneers in IVF encountered a frustrating issue. Often couples could not partake in IVF programmes due to a low number of mobile sperm and there were no techniques to effectively address this problem. A breakthrough came with the development of intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) which allows individual sperm cells to be carefully selected and injected into the embryo. ICSI can almost be considered as much of a breakthrough as IVF itself, greatly extending the success of infertility treatments. ICSI technology is here to stay and is expected to play a pivotal role in the future treatments of male infertility including stem cell therapy and extended germ culture.

 

5.       Time-lapse technology

Equipment in the IVF laboratory has dramatically evolved over the decades. Advances in engineering have provided ever more effective options for creating stable and controlled culture environments for embryos. A recent breakthrough has been the availability of time-lapse technology which allows embryologists to follow development of the embryo frame by frame, allowing for an even better understanding of developmental timing and morphology.

 

These are just a few of the many key developments in the history of IVF. And the future is even brighter with key research and advancements still being made in the field of reproductive medicine. At this year’s COGI conference on November 26-28, experts will be discussing some of the key controversies and sharing their latest research. We will be attending to provide you with the highlights so stay tuned for the most up to date insights in this remarkable area.

 

Sources:

Niderberger C, Pellicer A, Cohen J, et al. Forty years of IVF. Fertil and Steril. 2018; 110(2):185-324.e5

A year in review: Latest developments in women’s health

2017 brought some exciting and novel developments in women’s health, including some of the major updates we shared from the ESG congress last October. We shared interesting developments in women’s health key topics, including hormone-replacement therapy, contraception, and we have also provided some history behind steroid hormone receptor evolution. Let’s recap the key trends we have seen last year:

  • Breast cancer

Estrogen safety in relation to breast cancer (BC) risk is a widely discussed topic, data from the WHI RCT estrogen alone arm showed a decreased risk in breast cancer in women on the estrogen only treatment, this was also demonstrated in the study by Anderson et al., Lancet, Oncology, 2012, which showed a significant decrease in breast cancer incidence in women using estrogen and fewer deaths from breast cancers and other causes in the treatment arm compared to the placebo group. However, The NURSE study (Sisti et al., Int J Cancer, 2016) showed MHT use increased risk of luminal A and B breast cancer in women who used estrogen at long term treatment but not at short term treatment. Evidence from epidemiology also confirms the length of estrogen exposure increases the risk of breast cancer, as does age at menarche and age at menopause. Literature shows estrogen can promote or even initiate breast cancer, whereas preclinical studies show that aromatase inhibitors and antiestrogens can help prevent breast cancer. Data from the collaborative group on hormonal factors in breast cancer have shown that pre-menopausal women have a higher risk than postmenopausal women of the same age.

Although the results from studies seem to lead to different conclusions, comparing all the data available suggests that for women with a high BMI and high insulin resistance, estrogen could help to decrease BC risk by decreasing insulin resistance.  

  • Obesity

One of the most prominent changes during menopause is fat gain and change in a women’s body shape. Unlike other menopausal transitions, hormonal interventions currently available are not targeting this issue, which can have a negative impact on the overall health. The Interheart study and some recent data from the WHI, show it’s the site of fat that’s the biggest cause for concern as an increase in abdominal fat is linked to increased CVD risk.

Data from the WHI observation study showed women can be separated into four sections: metabolically benign normal weight, at risk normal weight, metabolically benign overweight and at risk overweight. These four categories scored very differently showing links between phenotypes, metabolic type and insulin resistance. Looking at women who have features of metabolic syndrome, showed they had higher markers such as IL-6. The very skinny or the very obese are more at risk than those who are or moderately obese.

  • Contraception

Lower levels of estrogen and progesterone can affect a number of different body functions, such as contraception. It’s important to understand that under the age of 50 women must use contraception for 2 years after diagnosis of menopause, over the age of 50, of they must use contraception for 1 year after diagnosis.

As we discussed in a previous post last October, contraception has also an important impact on diagnosis: if a patients is using a contraceptive doctors need to carry out FSH and LH twice, 6 weeks apart. Whilst tests can be done if a patient has an IUD or is on the POP, patients must stop COC for a cycle and stop DMPA for testing. When diagnosing, it’s important to think about the opportunities for screening and education. Discuss cervical screening, breast self-testing, osteoporosis risk, ovarian cancer, diabetes and incontinence, talk about symptoms and risk factors that increase with age.

  • Technology

Interestingly, now scientists are exploring whether transplanting lab-made ovaries might stop the common symptoms of menopause, such as hot flashes, sleep problems, weight gain, and worse, bone deterioration. In one of the first efforts to explore the potential of such a technique, researchers say they used tissue engineering to construct artificial rat ovaries able to supply female hormones like estrogen and progesterone. The results of the study were published in October last year in Nature communications. When tested in rats, the pieces of tissue, known as organoids, were better than traditional hormone replacement drugs at improving bone health and preventing weight gain. The treatment was also as good as hormone drugs at maintaining healthy tissue in the uterus.

Clinical trials of artificial ovaries are not likely to happen soon but it will definitely be interesting to see what will happen in 2018!